1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant's Requests and Issues: The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, while at the WTU (Warrior Transition Unit), the applicant was treated for physical and mental issues which significantly contributed to the discharge. The applicant made a severe judgment error and exclusively blames oneself. The applicant sought assistance numerous times to cope with the challenges but was met with sarcasm and criticism from the unit. The applicant's Alcohol and Drug program attempted to communicate with the unit on the applicant's behalf, but it had no effect on the unit's decisions, which was unfair and unjust. The unit suspected the applicant was lying and determined the applicant was not worth the time and effort. The applicant has always considered oneself a Soldier and wishes to have been able to complete the service, but because of the medical difficulties, it was impossible. The applicant is currently receiving treatment for the issues at the VA in Biloxi and has a disability rating of 90 percent. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 3 October 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's behavioral health conditions partially mitigating the applicant's offenses and the remainder of the applicant's misconduct being outweighed by the applicant's record of service. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to Honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), with a corresponding separation code of JKN, and the reentry code to RE-3. The Board determined the reentry code is proper and equitable and voted not to change it. Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board's decision. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) / AR 635- 200, Chapter 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 18 April 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 24 February 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 29 August 2013, the applicant tested positive for Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC); on four occasions, the applicant failed to obey lawful orders, including one on 3 June 2013, from CPT M. to keep the room clean and not leave it unsecured; the applicant was disrespectful to a noncommissioned officer on two occasions; and the applicant abandoned the place of duty without proper authorization on 10 December 2013. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 25 February 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 28 March 2014, the GCMCA considered and reviewed the medical evaluation board proceedings, the separation proceedings, and the chain of command's recommendations to separate the applicant from the Army and determined the applicant's medical condition was not the direct or substantial contributing cause of the conduct which led to the recommendation for an administrative separation. / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 22 February 2012 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / High School Graduate / 96 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 12N10, Horizontal Construction Specialist / 2 years, 1 month, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The applicant's Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), 21 April 2014, reflects the applicant was flagged for Drug Abuse (Adverse Action) (UA), effective 17 December 2013, and was ineligible for reenlistment due pending MEB/PEB (9H). The Assignment Eligibility Availability code (C) reflects the applicant was temporarily ineligible for reassignments due to medical, convalescence, student and/or trainees (except IET), enrollment in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) inpatient re-habilitation, or local bar to reenlistment. The applicant was reduced from E-2 to E-1, effective 5 June 2013. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Veterans Administration Disability rating decision, effective 19 April 2014, reflecting the applicant was rated 70 percent disability for PTSD (also claimed as depression and anxiety disorder, insomnia). (2) AMHRR Listed: Report of Medical Examination, 7 August 2013, the applicant noted behavioral health issues and the examining medical physician noted in the comments section: Multiple visits for behavioral health, depression, and per Behavioral Health, preexisting PTSD childhood issue, anxiety, and noncompliant with ordered evaluation. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, 19 September 2013, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and could appreciate the difference between right and wrong. The examiner commented, referring to "BH DP PCL-C=75 (Severe)-PTSD Symptoms:" The applicant "reports witnessing another [person] getting burned in a car accident," at "around age 11-12 years old and had nightmares of the incident for several months after with no formal evaluation, treatment, or diagnosis. Nightmares and emotional symptoms have recurred and become debilitating. Other manifestations are frequently recurring panic attacks and chronically elevated anxiety that have rendered [the applicant] mostly unable to perform even simple tasks in a low stress environment. Despite numerous interventions by command" and primary care, host nation, and BH providers in a six-month period, the applicant's "condition has steadily deteriorated." The applicant "has reached MRDP" and "no longer meets retention standards," and it is obvious the applicant is "incapable of returning to military duty now nor in the future." 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Two DD Forms 293; VA Ratings; DD Form 214; and ACTS General Data Printout. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD, TBI, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma. b. Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities' last names (2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. (1) Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. (2) Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. c. Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board) sets forth the policies and procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Servicemember's date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. (1) Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 3-7a states an Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. (3) Paragraph 3-7b states a General discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (4) Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. (5) Paragraph 14-3 prescribes a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record. (6) Paragraph 14-12c(2) terms abuse of illegal drugs as serious misconduct. It continues; however, by recognizing relevant facts may mitigate the nature of the offense. Therefore, a single drug abuse offense may be combined with one or more minor disciplinary infractions or incidents of other misconduct and processed for separation under paragraph 14-12a or 14-12b as appropriate. e. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKK" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (drug abuse). f. Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Reserve Components Enlistment Program, governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard for enlistment per DODI 1304.26. It also prescribes the appointment, reassignment, management, and mobilization of Reserve Officers' Training Corps cadets under the Simultaneous Membership Program. Chapter 4 provides the criteria and procedures for waiverable and nonwaiverable separations. Table 3-1 defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-4 Applies to: Person separated from last period of service with a nonwaiverable disqualification. This includes anyone with a DA imposed bar to reenlistment in effect at time of separation or separated for any reason (except length of service retirement) with 18 or more years active Federal service. Eligibility: Ineligible for enlistment. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant's Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends suffering from mental and physical medical issues contributed to the discharge and is currently receiving treatment for the medical issues as the VA has granted the applicant 90 percent disability rating. The applicant's evidence indicate the applicant was granted 70 percent disability for PTSD. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 19 September 2013, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible and recognized right from wrong. The MSE reflects diagnoses of AXIS I, an adjustment disorder "with mixed emotional features; Post-traumatic Stress Disorder" existed prior to service (EPTS) was "exacerbated by military service." The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends seeking help numerous times to cope with the medical issues but was met with sarcasm and criticism from the unit, and the Alcohol and Drug program's attempted communication with the unit had no effect on the unfair and unjust decisions to discharge the applicant. The evidence of AMHRR shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting to Army standards through the assistance of the primary care provider, host nation provider, and the Behavioral Health providers. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. 9. BOARD DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION: a. As directed by the 2017 memo signed by A.M. Kurta, the board considered the following factors: (1) Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, reviewed the applicant's DOD and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found that the applicant has the following potentially-mitigating diagnoses/experiences: Mood Disorder (Depression), Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, Unspecified Depressive Disorder with Panic. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD and MDD during service and SC for Mood Disorder Post-service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant's behavioral health conditions partially mitigate the applicant's misconduct. As there is an association between Mood Disorder and comorbid substance abuse there is a nexus between the applicant's diagnosis and misconduct characterized by wrongful use of THC. Also, as there is an association between Mood Disorder and decreased motivation, lethargy, and forgetfulness, there is an association with the applicant's disobeying a lawful order in the context of having an untidy room and failure to secure said room, and the disorder. In the absence of information regarding the other failures to obey a direct order, this advisor cannot offer an informed opine, however, in most instances failure to obey a direct order is not mitigated by Mood Disorder. Misconduct characterized by leaving the applicant's place of duty appears related to the applicant seeking medical care related to a possible head injury sustained on the morning of 10 December 2013, as captured in the medical record, and given the potential seriousness the complaint secondary to an MVA, the applicant's concern for the applicant's physical health should be seen as a mitigating factor. With regard to disrespect of an NCO, as with the additional instances of disobeying an order, in absence of detail related to the disrespect, this advisor cannot render a fully informed opinion regarding mitigation, however, given that one instance of disrespect resulted in an Article 15, the BMA infers the misconduct was not characterized by minor misconduct and therefore not mitigated. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant's Mood Disorder (Depression), Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, or Unspecified Depressive Disorder with Panic outweighed the applicant's medically unmitigated disrespect toward an NCO offense. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends suffering from mental and physical medical issues contributed to the discharge and is currently receiving treatment for the medical issues as the VA has granted the applicant 90 percent disability rating. The Board liberally considered this contention but determined that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant's Mood Disorder (Depression), Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, or Unspecified Depressive Disorder with Panic outweighed the applicant's medically unmitigated disrespect toward an NCO offense. However, the Board determined that this unmitigated offense is outweighed by the applicant's length of service, to include overseas service. Therefore, a discharge upgrade is warranted. (2) The applicant contends seeking help numerous times to cope with the medical issues but was met with sarcasm and criticism from the unit, and the Alcohol and Drug program's attempted communication with the unit had no effect on the unfair and unjust decisions to discharge the applicant. The Board considered this contention during proceedings but ultimately did not address it due to an upgrade being granted for the reasons discuss above in 9b(1). c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's behavioral health conditions partially mitigating the applicant's offenses and the remainder of the applicant's misconduct being outweighed by the applicant's record of service. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to Honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), with a corresponding separation code of JKN, and the reentry code to RE-3. The Board determined the reentry code is proper and equitable and voted not to change it. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's Mood Disorder (Depression), Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, or Unspecified Depressive Disorder with Panic mitigated a majority of the applicant's misconduct. The Board determined that remained medically unmitigated offense of disrespect toward an NCO was outweighed by the applicant's length of service, to include overseas service. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) under the same pretexts, thus the reason for discharge is no longer appropriate. The SPD code associated with the new reason for discharge is JKN. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions)/JKN d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: AR 635-200 Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge BH - Behavioral Health CG - Company Grade Article 15 CID - Criminal Investigation Division ELS - Entry Level Status FG - Field Grade Article 15 GD - General Discharge HS - High School HD - Honorable Discharge IADT - Initial Active Duty Training MP - Military Police MST - Military Sexual Trauma N/A - Not applicable NCO - Noncommissioned Officer NIF - Not in File NOS - Not Otherwise Specified OAD - Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) - Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF - Official Military Personnel File PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE - Re-entry SCM - Summary Court Martial SPCM - Special Court Martial SPD - Separation Program Designator TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA - Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20210001540 1